Technological, organisational and environmental determinants of smart contracts adoption: UK construction sector viewpoint

References

• Ahuja, R., et al., 2016. Adoption of BIM by architectural firms in India: technology–organization–environment perspective. Architectural engineering and design management, 12 (4), 311–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50 (2), 179–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Zoubi, M.I., 2013. Predicting e-business adoption through integrating the constructs of Rogers’s diffusion of innovation theory combined with technology- organization-environment model. International journal of advanced computer research, 3 (4), 2277–7970.
   Google Scholar
• Antoniou, F. and Aretoulis, G.N., 2018. Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods in choosing contract type for highway construction in Greece. International journal of management and decision making, 17 (1), 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Arcadis, 2020. Global Construction Disputes Report 2020: collaborating to achieve project excellence. Available from: https://www.arcadis.com/media/6/B/4/%7B6B4A5CF8-ACE1-4FD6-82C4-A5CF347B0998%7DGlobal%20Construction%20Disputes%202020.pdf [Accessed 5 July 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth, A. and Perera, S., 2018. Contractual procedures in the construction industry. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Assaf, S.A., and Al-Hejji, S., 2006. Causes of delay in large construction projects. International journal of project management, 24 (4), 349–357.
   Google Scholar
• Badenfelt, U., 2010. I trust you, I trust you not: a longitudinal study of control mechanisms in incentive contracts. Construction management and economics, 28 (3), 301–310.
   Google Scholar
• Badi, S., et al., 2020. Blockchain-based innovation in UK construction: A user perspective. In: European Academy of Management (EURAM) Annual Conference, 4–6th December 2020. Dublin, Ireland: Trinity College.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, R., Müller-Bloch, C., and King, J.L., 2018. Governance in the blockchain economy: a framework and research agenda. Journal of the association for information systems, 9 (10), 1020–1034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bocek, T., Rodrigues, B. B., Strasser, T., and Stiller, B. (2017, May). Blockchains everywhere-a use-case of blockchains in the pharma supply chain. In: 2017 IFIP/IEEE symposium on integrated network and service management (IM). IEEE, 772–777.
   Google Scholar
• Bosch-Rekveldt, M., et al., 2011. Grasping project complexity in large engineering projects: The TOE (Technical, Organizational and Environmental) framework. International Journal of Project Management, 29 (6), 728–739.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boucher, P. 2017. How blockchain technology could change our lives: in-depth analysis. European Parliament. Available from: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/581948/EPRS_IDA(2017)581948_EN.pdf [Accessed 5 July 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Boukendour, S., 2007. Preventing post-contractual opportunism by an option to switch from one contract to another. Construction management and economics, 25 (7), 723–727.
   Google Scholar
• Briscoe, G.H., et al., 2004. Client‐led strategies for construction supply chain improvement. Construction management and economics, 22 (2), 193–201.
   Google Scholar
• Cakmak, E. and Cakmak, P.I., 2014. An analysis of causes of disputes in the construction industry using analytical network process. Procedia – social and behavioral sciences, 109, 183–187.
   Google Scholar
• Cardeira, H., 2015. Smart contracts and possible applications to the construction industry. Romanian construction law review, 1 (1), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Carmichael, D.G., 2002. Disputes and international projects. Rotterdam: A A Balkema.
   Google Scholar
• Carmichael, D.G. and Balatbat, M.C.A., 2010. A contractor’s analysis of the likelihood of payment of claims. Journal of financial management of property and construction, 15 (2), 102–117.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, A.P.C. and Yeong, C.M., 1995. A comparison of strategies for reducing variations. Construction management and economics, 13 (6), 467–473.
   Google Scholar
• Chandra, S. and Kumar, K.N., 2018. Exploring factors influencing organizational adoption of augmented reality in E-commerce: an empirical analysis using the technology-organization-environment model. Journal of electronic commerce research, 19 (3), 237–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., et al., 2019. Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 26 (9), 1878–1898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung, S.O., and Pang, K.H.Y., 2013. Anatomy of construction disputes. Journal of construction engineering and management, 139 (1), 15–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung, S.O. and Yiu, T.W., 2006. Are construction disputes inevitable? IEEE transactions on engineering management, 53 (3), 456–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong, J.L.L. and Olesen, K., 2017. A technology-organization-environment perspective on eco-effectiveness: a meta-analysis. Australasian journal of information systems, 21, 1-26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohn, A., West, T., and Parker, C., 2017. Smart after all: blockchain, smart contracts, para-metric insurance, and smart energy grids. Georgetown law technology review, 1, 273–304. https://perma.cc/TY7W-Q8CX.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, B., 2012. Inquiry into construction industry insolvency in NSW. Sydney, Australia: NSW Government. Available from: https://www.finance.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/IICII-final-report.pdf [Accessed 5th July 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S., 2011. Business research methods (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 13 (3), 319–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Filippi, P. and Hassan, S., 2018. Blockchain technology as a regulatory technology: From code is law to law is code. First monday, 21 (12–5), 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• DePietro, R., Wiarda, E., and Fleischer, M., 1990. The context for change: organization, technology and environment. In: L. G. Tornatzky and M. Fleischer, eds. The processes of technological innovation. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 151–175.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, E. and Westerberg, M., 2011. Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construction project performance: a conceptual framework. International Journal of Project Management, 29, 197–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Etikan, I., Musa, S.A., and Alkassim, R.S., 2016. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5 (1), 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission, 2016. Trend Report: Optimal recycling, big data from space, and blockchain applications: disruption and policy response. European Commission, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Fenn, P., Lowe, D., and Speck, C., 1997. Conflict and dispute in construction. Construction management and economics, 15 (6), 513–518.
   Google Scholar
• Frantz, C. K. and Nowostawski, M. (2016, September). From institutions to code: towards automated generation of smart contracts. In: 2016 IEEE 1st International Workshops on Foundations and Applications of Self* Systems (FAS* W). IEEE, 210–215, Augsburg, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Fu, H.P. and Su, H.T., 2014. A framework for a technology- organization- environment implementation model in Taiwan’s traditional retail supermarkets. The international journal of organisational innovation, 6 (3), 121–129.
   Google Scholar
• Gandhak, P. and Sabihuddin, S., 2014. Stakeholders’ perception of the causes and effect of construction delays on project delivery-a review. Journal of construction engineering and project management, 4 (4), 41–46.
   Google Scholar
• García-Moreno, M.B., et al., 2016. An explanatory model of the organisational factors that explain the adoption of e-business. Journal of industrial engineering and management, 9 (2), 547–581.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, J.L. and Kraemer, K.L., 2004. A cross‐country investigation of the determinants of scope of e‐commerce use: an institutional approach. Electronic markets, 14 (2), 124–137.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, C.M., 1994. Choosing appropriate construction contracting method. Journal of construction engineering and management, 120 (1), 196–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutierrez, A., Boukrami, E., and Lumsden, R., 2015. Technological, organisational and environmental factors influencing managers’ decision to adopt cloud computing in the UK. Journal of enterprise information management, 28 (6), 788–807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackett, R., 2016. Walmart and IBM are partnering to put Chinese pork on a blockchain. Fortune (October 19, 2016). Available from: https://fortune.com/2016/10/19/walmart-ibm-blockchain-china-pork/ [Accessed 10 May 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J.F., et al., 2010. Multivariate data analysis. Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Hawlitschek, F., Notheisen, B., and Teubner, T., 2018. The limits of trust-free systems: a literature review on blockchain technology and trust in the sharing economy. Electronic commerce research and applications, 29, 50–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, J., 2014. The theory and practice of change management. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hong, W.Y. and Zhu, K., 2006. Migrating to Internet-based e-commerce: factors affecting e-commerce adoption and migration at the firm level. Information & management, 43 (2), 204–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibem, E.O., et al., 2016. Factors influencing e-Procurement adoption in the Nigerian building industry. Construction economics and building, 16 (4), 54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilin, V., Ivetić, J., and Simić, D., 2017. Understanding the determinants of e-business adoption in ERP-enabled firms and non-ERP-enabled firms: A case study of the Western Balkan Peninsula. Technological forecasting and social change, 125, 206–223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser, H.F., 1974. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39 (1), 31–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall, J.D., et al., 2001. Receptivity of Singapore’s SMEs to electronic commerce adoption. The journal of strategic information systems, 10 (3), 223–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khalfan, M.M., McDermott, P., and Swan, W., 2007. Building trust in construction projects. Supply chain management: an international journal, 12 (6), 385–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S.Y., Van Tuan, N., and Ogunlana, S.O., 2009. Quantifying schedule risk in construction projects using Bayesian belief networks. International journal of project management, 27 (1), 39–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S., Park, C. H., and Chin, S., 2016. Assessment of BIM acceptance degree of Korean AEC participants. KSCE Journal of civil engineering, 20 (4), 1163–1177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinnaird, C. and Geipel, M. (2017). Blockchain technology: how the inventions behind bitcoin are enabling a network of trust for the built environment’, Arup Blockchain Technology Report. Arup, London, UK. [Online]. Available from: file:///C:/Users/Sulafa%20Badi/Downloads/Arup%20%20Blockchain%20Technology%20Report_comp%20(1).pdf [Accessed 10 July 2020]
   Google Scholar
• Kokina, J., Mancha, R., and Pachamanova, D., 2017. Blockchain: emergent industry adoption and implications. Journal of emerging technologies in accounting, 14 (2), 91–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotter, J.P. and Schlesinger, L.A., 1979. Choosing strategies for change. Harvard business review, 57 (2), 106–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozek, J.B. and Hebberd, C.G., 1989. Contracts: share the risk. Water engineering and management, 136 (6), 20–26.
   Google Scholar
• Kuan, K.K.Y. and Chau, P.Y.K., 2001. A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small businesses using a technology-organisation-environment framework. Information & management, 38 (8), 507–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laforet, S., 2011. A framework of organisational innovation and outcomes in SMEs. International journal of entrepreneurial behavior & research, 17 (4), 380–408.
   Google Scholar
• Lau, E. and Rowlinson, S., 2009. Interpersonal trust and inter‐firm trust in construction projects. Construction management and economics, 27 (6), 539–554.
   Google Scholar
• Lauslahti, K., Mattila, J., and Seppala, T., 2017. Smart contracts–How will blockchain technology affect contractual practices? ETLA Reports, No. 68, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy (ETLA), Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Law, A. (2017). Smart contracts and their application in supply chain management. Doctoral thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., 2004. Discriminant analysis of technology adoption behaviour: a case of internet technologies in small businesses. Journal of computer information systems, 44 (4), 57–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, J., Greenwood, D., and Kassem, M., 2019. Blockchain in the built environment and construction industry: A systematic review, conceptual models and practical use cases. Automation in construction, 102, 288–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, A. and Chen, N.C., 2012. Cloud computing as an innovation: perception, attitude, and adoption. International journal of information management, 32 (2012), 533–540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Low, C., Chen, Y., and Wu, M., 2011. Understanding the determinants of cloud computing adoption. Industrial management & data systems, 111 (7), 1006–1023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mallery, P. and George, D., 2003. SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, J., 2017. Intelligent contracts and the construction industry. Journal of legal affairs and dispute resolution in engineering and construction, 9 (3), 04517012–1–04517012-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, J. and Escott, H., 2018. Smart Contracts in Construction: A Single Source of Truth or Mere Double-Speak?. https://pipeguild.com/sites/default/files/paper127.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mik, E., 2017. Smart contracts: terminology, technical limitations and real world complexity. Law, innovation and technology, 9 (2), 269–300.
   Google Scholar
• Morledge, R. and Smith, A., 2013. Building procurement (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Oliveira, T. and Martins, M.F., 2010. Understanding e-business adoption across industries in European countries. Industrial management & data systems, 110 (8), 1337–1354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortolani, P., 2019. The impact of blockchain technologies and smart contracts on dispute resolution: arbitration and court litigation at the crossroads. Uniform law review, 24 (2), 430–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, M.J. and Jang, W.Y., 2008. Determinants of the adoption of enterprise resource planning within the technology-organization-environment framework, Taiwan’s communications. Journal of computer information systems, 48 (3), 94–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peñaloza, G.A., Saurin, T.A., and Formoso, C.T., 2020. Monitoring complexity and resilience in construction projects: the contribution of safety performance measurement systems. Applied ergonomics, 82, 102978.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W., 1986. Self-reports in organisational research: problems and prospects. Journal of management, 12 (4), 531–544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., and Smith-Doerr, L., 1996. Interorganisational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative science quarterly, 41 (1), 116–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramdani, B., Chevers, D., and Williams, D.A., 2013. SMEs’ adoption of enterprise applications: a technology-organisation-environment model. Journal of small business and enterprise development, 20 (4), 735–753.
   Google Scholar
• Rizzo, P. (2016). World’s largest mining company to use blockchain for supply chain. CoinDesk. Available online: https://www.coindesk.com/bhp-billiton-blockchain-mining-company-supply-chain. [Accessed 26 April 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E.M., 2003. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sambasivan, M. and Soon, Y.W., 2007. Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry. International journal of project management, 25 (5), 517–526.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A., 2016. Research methods for business students. 6th ed. Harlow: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Savelyev, A., 2017. Contract law 2.0: ‘Smart’ contracts as the beginning of the end of classic contract law. Information & communications technology law, 26 (2), 116–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, L., Evans, J. and Kim, A. (2018). Why blockchain smart contracts matter. International law review, 1-11. Available online: https://search.proquest.com/docview/2020422359?accountid=11796 [Accessed 10 May 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., and Davis, J. H., 2007. An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of management, 32 (2), 344–354.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, W., et al., 2017. Causes of contractors’ claims in international engineering-procurement-construction projects. Journal of civil engineering and management, 23 (6), 727–739.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, D.D., 2019. Blockchain: The emerging technology of digital trust. Telematics and informatics, 45, 101278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sila, I., 2013. Factors affecting the adoption of b2b e- commerce technologies. Electronic commerce research, 13 (2), 199–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soosay, C.A., Hyland, P.W., and Ferrer, M., 2008. Supply chain collaboration: capabilities for continuous innovation. Supply chain management: an international journal, 13 (2), 160–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soto Acosta, P., Popa, S., and Palacios-Marques, D., 2016. E-business, organisational innovation and firm performance in manufacturing SMEs: an empirical study in Spain. Technological and economic development of economy, 22 (6), 885–904.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Surujnath, 2017. Off the chain! A guide to blockchain derivatives markets and the implications on systematic risk. Fordham journal of corporate and financial law, XXII, 256–304.
   Google Scholar
• Szabo, N. (1997). The idea of smart contracts. Nick Szabo’s Papers and Concise Tutorials, 6. Available from: https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.best.vwh.net/idea.html [Accessed 23 April 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Teoa, T.S.H., Lina, S., and Laib, K.H., 2009. Adopters and non-adopters of e-procurement in Singapore: an empirical study. Omega, 37 (5), 972–987.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson Reuters, 2018. Blockchain for construciton/real estate. Available from: https://mena.thomsonreuters.com/content/dam/openweb/documents/pdf/mena/white-paper/Blockchain_for_Construction_Whitepaper.pdf [Accessed 26 April 2020]
   Google Scholar
• Thong, J.Y.L., 1999. An integrated model of information systems adoption in small businesses. Journal of management information systems, 15 (4), 187–214.
   Google Scholar
• Tran, H. and Carmichael, D.G., 2012. Contractor’s financial estimation based on owner payment histories. Organisation, technology and management in construction. An international journal, 4 (2), 481–489.
   Google Scholar
• Tran, Q., et al., 2014. Initial adoption versus institutionalisation of e-procurement in construction firms: an empirical investigation in Vietnam. Journal of global information technology management, 17 (2), 91–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treiblmaier, H., 2018. The impact of the blockchain on the supply chain: a theory-based research framework and a call for action. Supply chain management: an international journal, 23/6 (2018), 545–559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uccuru, P., 2017. Beyond bitcoin: an early overview on smart contracts. International journal of law and information technology, 25 (3), 179–195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V., et al., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: toward a Unified View. MIS quarterly, 27 (3), 425–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vos, G. (2019), Crypto-assets as property: how English law can boost the confidence of would-be parties to smart legal contracts. Speech by Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court. Available from: https://www.judiciary.uk/announcements/speech-by-sir-geoffrey-vos-chancellor-of-the-high-court-cryptoassets-as-property/ [Accessed 26 April 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Wang, J., et al., 2017. The outlook of blockchain technology for construction engineering management. Frontiers of engineering management, 4 (1), 67–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winfield, M. and Rock, S., (2018). The Winfield rock report: overcoming the legal and contractual barriers of BIM. Available from: http://www.ukbimalliance.org/media/1185/the_winfield_rock_report.pdf [Accessed 26 April 2020]
   Google Scholar
• Wong, W.K., et al., 2008. A framework for trust in construction contracting. International journal of project management, 26 (8), 821–829.
   Google Scholar
• Zaghloul, R. and Hartman, F., 2003. Construction contracts: the cost of mistrust. International journal of project management, 21 (6), 419–424.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, K., et al., 2004. Information technology payoff in e-business environments: an international perspective on value creation of e-business in the financial services industry. Journal of management information systems, 21 (1), 17–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar